Election Audit Laws: 50-State Survey

Our democracy depends on election accuracy. Thus, most states have devised processes for auditing results. Post-election audits compare a sample of paper ballots or other records with the results produced by the voting system. States have cited varying purposes for audits, but generally they can help detect any problems with voting equipment or procedures, while verifying that the election outcome is accurate and curbing concerns of fraud.

Audits come in two main forms: traditional and risk-limiting audits. A traditional audit checks a certain percentage or number of precincts, voting machines, or other units. The size of the audit usually does not vary based on the margin of victory. By contrast, a risk-limiting audit aims to “limit the risk” of certifying an incorrect outcome by using statistical principles. The size of the audit varies based on the margin of victory. If a candidate or issue prevailed easily, the audit will check fewer ballots or records than if the election was closely contested. In other words, a properly conducted risk-limiting audit can provide a more efficient but still accurate way of evaluating procedures and results.

Audits Are Not Recounts

A full recount of results generally occurs only in a very close election. On the other hand, an audit essentially consists of a partial recount that occurs regardless of how close the contest was. (An audit that reveals discrepancies sometimes may result in a full recount.)

This survey focuses on the main laws governing post-election audits in each state. It describes features such as the timing and scope of each audit, as well as what happens when an audit reveals a discrepancy with the reported results. The survey also provides the applicable statutes (and some related regulations and election manuals) so that readers who want to know more or have specific questions can consult these resources directly.

Alabama Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: None
  • Timing of audit: N/A
  • Scope of audit: N/A

Alabama does not have a statute generally providing for post-election audits. However, Code of Alabama Section 17-16-90 set up a procedure for a limited post-election audit of the statewide general election in 2022.

Alaska Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Alaska Statutes Section 15.15.420 et seq.
  • Timing of audit: As soon as practicable after the election is completed, and not later than 16 days afterward
  • Scope of audit: Review of precinct registers, tallies, and ballots cast; review of absentee and questioned ballots; hand count of ballots from one randomly selected precinct in each house district that accounts for at least 5 percent of the ballots cast in the district

If the Director of the Division of Elections finds that there is a discrepancy of more than 1 percent between the results of the hand count above and the count certified by the election board, the Director will conduct a hand count of the ballots from that district. Also, if the Director finds an unexplained discrepancy in the ballot count in any precinct, the Director may count the ballots from that precinct. The Director will certify in writing to the state ballot counting review board and publish on the Division of Elections website any changes resulting from this process.

Arizona Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Arizona Revised Statutes Section 16-602 (also see Arizona Election Procedures Manual)
  • Timing of audit: Within 24 hours after closing of polls; must be completed before the canvassing of the election for that county
  • Scope of audit: 1 percent of early ballots or 5,000 early ballots, whichever is less; regular ballots from 2 percent of precincts or 2 precincts, whichever is greater (in counties with vote centers, regular ballots from 2 percent of vote centers or 2 vote centers, whichever is greater)

The Arizona audit covers up to five contested races for each primary, special, and general election. These typically include one statewide ballot measure, one contested statewide race for statewide office, one contested race for the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives, and one contested race for the state house of representatives or state senate, as well as the presidential race in a presidential election.

If the margin of difference in an early ballot hand count is equal to or greater than the designated early ballot hand count margin for any race, the Hand Count Board will repeat the hand count of the same early ballots for that race. If the margin again is equal to or greater than the designated early ballot hand count margin for any race, the Hand Count Board will conduct an expanded early ballot hand count for that race. This will include a number of additional early ballots equal to 1 percent of the total early ballots cast or an additional 5,000 ballots, whichever is less. If the expanded early ballot audit results in a difference that is equal to or greater than the designated early ballot hand count margin for that race, the manual counts will be expanded for that race until a manual count results in a margin that is less than the designated margin, or until all early ballots for that race have been hand counted if that happens first. All results will be documented in writing and signed by the official in charge of elections and a representative of each political party.

For the precinct hand count, if any hand-counted race results in a calculated margin that is equal to or greater than the designated margin for the precinct hand count, a second precinct hand count of that race and of the same ballots will be performed. If the second precinct hand count results in a margin that is equal to or greater than the designated margin, the precinct hand count will be expanded to include a total of twice the original number of randomly selected precincts or polling locations. If the expanded precinct hand count results in a calculated margin that is equal to or greater than the designated precinct hand count margin, the precinct hand count will be extended to include the entire jurisdiction for that race. The full hand count must be repeated for a particular race until the results of a full hand count are identical to the results of another full hand count for that race. When an identical hand count result is achieved, the hand count rather than the electronic tabulation will serve as the official result for the race in that county.

Arkansas Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Arkansas Code Section 7-4-121
  • Timing of audit: Counties to be audited must be selected within 60 days after the general election
  • Scope of audit: Counties, polling sites, early voting locations, and vote centers to be audited are selected by lot; a sufficient number of early voting locations, polling sites, and vote centers must be selected to obtain a meaningful sample

The State Board of Elections Commissioners will conduct the audit by using the voter-verified paper audit trail. The Board will compile a report detailing the findings of the audit. However, the report has no legal effect on the outcome of any election subject to the audit. It will be made public and disseminated to any person on request.

California Election Audit Laws

In an election conducted by using vote centers, a 1 percent manual tally can be conducted by using the batch process specified by statute. An elections official may use either of two methods. First, the elections official may conduct a public manual tally of the ballots canvassed in the semifinal official canvass (including vote by mail ballots) cast in 1 percent of the precincts (or one precinct if greater), as well as a count of one additional precinct for each race not included in the initial group of precincts. Alternatively, the elections official may conduct a two-part public manual tally, which includes a public manual tally of the ballots canvassed in the semifinal official canvass (excluding vote by mail ballots) cast in 1 percent of the precincts and conducted as above, as well as a public manual tally of at least 1 percent of the vote by mail ballots canvassed in the semifinal official canvass. In addition to the 1 percent manual tally of the vote by mail ballots, the elections official must count one additional batch of vote by mail ballots for each race not included in the initial 1 percent manual tally of vote by mail ballots.

The elections official must include a report on the results of the 1 percent manual tally in the certification of the official canvass of the vote. The report will identify any discrepancies between the machine count and the manual tally and describe how each of these discrepancies was resolved. In resolving a discrepancy involving a vote recorded by electronic or electromechanical vote tabulating devices, the voter verified paper audit trail will govern if there is a discrepancy with the electronic record.

Colorado Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Colorado Code Section 1-7-515 (also see Election Rule 25)
  • Timing of audit: Audit reports must be completed by 5 P.M. one business day before the canvass deadline
  • Scope of audit: Secretary of State will establish and publish the risk limits that will apply for an election no later than 32 days before election day (risk limits may be different for comparison audits and ballot polling audits, and for audits of statewide and countywide contests)

After each primary, general, coordinated, recall, or congressional vacancy election, each county will use a risk-limiting audit. (This is defined as an audit protocol that uses statistical methods and is designed to limit to acceptable levels the risk of certifying a preliminary election outcome that is incorrect.) In a general or coordinated election, the Secretary of State will select at least one statewide contest, and for each county at least one other contest. The Secretary of State will select other ballot contests for audit if there is no statewide contest in any particular election. In a primary election, the Secretary of State will select at least one contest of each major political party in each county.

The audit will continue until the risk limit for the target contests is met or until a full hand count results. If the county audit reports reflect that the risk limit has not been satisfied in a target contest, the Secretary of State will randomly select additional ballots for audit.

The audit board will submit the report to the Secretary of State. The report will include any discrepancies found and the corresponding ballot images. The Secretary of State will review the report and may direct the county clerk to conduct additional audit rounds, a random audit, a full hand count, or other action. In addition, they may instruct the county to delay canvass until it completes an additional audit or other action.

Connecticut Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Connecticut General Statutes Section 9-320f
  • Timing of audit: No earlier than the 15th day after an election or primary, and no later than 2 business days before the canvass
  • Scope of audit: Votes recorded in not less than 5 percent of the voting districts in the state, district, or municipality, whichever is applicable

An audit may be manual or electronic, and the voting districts subject to an audit will be selected in a random drawing by the Secretary of State. The audit covers only certain offices. In a presidential or gubernatorial election, the audit covers all offices required to be audited by federal law, plus one additional office selected randomly, but in no case less than three offices. The statute provides different rules for municipal and primary elections.

In general, the Secretary of State will order a discrepancy recanvass of the returns of an election or primary for any office if a discrepancy exists in which the margin of victory in the race for the office is less than the amount of the discrepancy multiplied by the total number of voting districts where the race appeared on the ballot. A discrepancy is defined as a difference in vote totals between tabulator counts from an election or primary and manual or electronic counts from an audit in a voting district that exceeds 0.5 percent of the lesser amount of the vote totals between the tabulator counts and the manual or electronic counts, if these differences cannot be resolved through an accounting of ballots that were not marked properly.

Delaware Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: 15 Delaware Code Section 5012A (also see Delaware regulations)
  • Timing of audit: 48 hours after certification of results (audit 1); 60 days after certification of results (audits 2a and 2b)
  • Scope of audit: 1 randomly selected voting device in each county and 1 randomly selected election district in the City of Wilmington (audit 1); all results of 1 randomly selected election district in each county and 1 randomly selected election district in the City of Wilmington (audit 2a); the results of 1 randomly selected election district in each county and 1 randomly selected election district in the City of Wilmington in 1 randomly selected statewide race (audit 2b) (note that all districts must be different in audits 1, 2a, and 2b)

Within 60 days of an audit, the Department of Elections will publish a report containing the results of the audit and post the report on its website. If audit results from a component of the voting system do not agree with certified election results, and the discrepancy is greater than 0.5 percent from the certified results totals, this will trigger additional audits of the voting system exhibiting the discrepancy, as well as additional testing and analysis of the voting system exhibiting the discrepancy. Delaware regulations provide further details about the follow-up process and corrective actions that the Department will take to avoid future discrepancies.

Florida Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Florida Statutes Section 101.591
  • Timing of audit: Immediately after certification of election; must be completed and results made public no later than 11:59 P.M. on the 7th day after certification of the election
  • Scope of audit: Manual tally of votes cast in 1 randomly selected race that appears on the ballot (1-2 percent of precincts), or automated tally of votes cast across every race that appears on the ballot (at least 20 percent of precincts)

By December 15 of each general election year, the county canvassing board or the board responsible for certifying the election must provide a report with the results of the audit to the Department of State. The report must cover the overall accuracy of the audit, a description of any problems or discrepancies, the likely cause of the problems or discrepancies, and recommended corrective action regarding avoiding or mitigating these circumstances in future elections.

Georgia Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Georgia Code Section 21-2-498
  • Timing of audit: Must be completed before final certification of the contests
  • Scope of audit: Risk limit must not exceed 8 percent in 2024, 6 percent in 2026, and 5 percent or less in 2028 and thereafter

Local election superintendents must conduct pre-certification risk-limiting audits on selected contests after any election, special election, election runoff, special election runoff, primary, special primary, primary runoff, or special primary runoff with presidential, U.S. Senate, or statewide contests. Selected contests include the contest at the top of the ballot, as well as one contest among various other races if they are on the ballot but not the top race, including U.S. Senate, Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, State School Superintendent, Commissioner of Insurance, Commissioner of Agriculture, Commissioner of Labor, Supreme Court Justice, Judge of the Court of Appeals, or Public Service Commissioner. An election superintendent may conduct tabulation or risk-limiting audits in additional contests if circumstances warrant auditing those contests.

The audit involves a manual inspection of random samples of paper official ballots. In conducting an audit, election superintendents must ensure that all types of ballots are included, whether they are cast in person or by absentee ballot, advance voting, provisional ballot, or otherwise. Election superintendents must provide a report of the unofficial final tabulated vote results for the contests to the public before conducting the audit, complete the audit in public view, and provide details of the audit to the public within 48 hours of completion.

Hawaii Election Audit Laws

The chief election officer must conduct a post-election, pre-certification audit to verify that the electronic tallies generated by the system in the sample precincts equal hand tallies of the paper ballots generated by the system in those precincts. If discrepancies appear in the pre-certification audits, the chief election officer must immediately conduct an expanded audit to determine the extent of misreporting in the system. The results of the expanded audit will be filed with the Office of Elections. The chief election officer will resolve any misreporting problem to the extent possible before the end of the contest period. Any resolution of a misreporting problem also will be documented and filed with the Office of Elections.

Idaho Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Idaho Code Section 34-1203A (also see Idaho Secretary of State Directives)
  • Timing of audit: Secretary of State must determine procedures for audit by a directive issued at least 60 days before the election
  • Scope of audit: Precincts selected by lot by the Secretary of State and must not exceed 5 percent of the precincts in the county or 1 precinct, whichever is greater (multiple precincts may be selected in a county if the number of ballots from the selected precincts is less than 2,100)

After the completion of all county canvasses for a primary or general election, the Secretary of State must identify and order a post-election audit of certain paper ballots cast in any election, must immediately post a list of the selected elections, counties, and precincts on the Secretary of State website, and must immediately notify each affected county clerk and county sheriff. The audit must include a hand recount of the ballots subject to the audit and a comparison to the results reported by the county for any precincts, days, batches, legislative districts, and tabulation machines selected for audit.

A post-election audit may be ordered for any federal elections held in Idaho, the governor election, the statewide office election with the narrowest percentage margin of votes, the statewide ballot question election with the narrowest percentage margin of votes, and one legislative office election in the county. Within the time specified in the pre-election directive, the Secretary of State must report the results of any post-election audits on the Secretary of State website and to the county clerk of each county in which paper ballots were audited. The Secretary of State may order additional post-election audits if they determine that this is warranted by the findings of the initial audits. Additional audits must be limited to the types of problems identified by the initial audits.

Illinois Election Audit Laws

Illinois has three parallel statutes on election audits, covering various voting systems. Section 5/24A-15 applies to central-count systems, Section 5/24B-15 applies to voter-fed optical scanners, and Section 5/24C-15 applies to direct recording electronic systems. (The systems covered by Section 5/24B-15 are the most prevalent voting systems in the state.)

Under Section 5/24A-15 and Section 5/24B-15, the audit applies only to jurisdictions where in-precinct counting equipment is used. The precincts and voting devices will be selected after election day on a random basis by the State Board of Elections. As part of the audit, the election authority will test the computer program in the selected precincts and on the selected early voting devices. The test will be conducted by processing a preaudited group of ballots marked to record a predetermined number of valid votes for each candidate and on each public question. If any error is detected, the cause will be determined and corrected, and an errorless count will be made before the official canvass and proclamation of election results.

Under Section 5/24C-15, the precincts and voting devices also will be selected after election day on a random basis by the State Board of Elections. The test will be conducted by counting the votes marked on the permanent paper record of each ballot cast in the tested precinct printed by the voting system at the time that each ballot was cast and comparing the results of this count with the results shown by the certificate of results prepared by the direct recording electronic voting system in the precinct. If any error is detected, the cause will be determined and corrected, and an errorless count will be made before the official canvass and proclamation of election results. If this happens, or if an errorless count cannot be conducted, the election authority must submit a written report to the appropriate canvassing board, explaining the results of the test and any errors. The report will be made available for public inspection.

Indiana Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Indiana Code Section 3-11-13-38; Section 3-12-3.5-8; Section 3-12-13-4 et seq.
  • Timing of audit: 12 days after election for audits under Section 3-11-13-38; 30 days after election for audits under Section 3-12-3.5-8; see Section 3-12-13-7 for deadlines for various types of audits under Section 3-12-13-4 et seq.
  • Scope of audit: 5 percent of the precincts or 5 precincts, whichever is greater, in which a ballot card voting system was used for audits under Section 3-11-13-38; all votes in a precinct where audit threshold number is equaled or exceeded for audits under Section 3-12-3.5-8; not specified by statute for audits under Section 3-12-13-4 et seq.

Indiana has several statutes providing for various types of audits, none of which is mandatory. Section 3-11-13-38 allows the county chairman for either major party to petition the county election board for confirmation of the vote cast on a ballot card voting system at some point between the Saturday before an election and the Thursday after an election. The county election board then must confirm that the votes cast in an election for each candidate and each public question on a ballot card voting system were correctly counted by the system. Public notice of the time and place of this type of audit must be given at least 48 hours in advance. One copy of the certified results of the audit will be filed with the election returns, and another will be delivered to the election division.

Meanwhile, Section 3-12-3.5-8 applies to electronic system votes. If the difference between the number of votes cast on the electronic voting systems in a precinct and the number of voters who cast ballots on the electronic voting systems as shown on a form for the precinct is greater than or equal to the “audit threshold number,” as defined by that statute, the county election board or the secretary of state may order an audit of all the votes cast in that precinct. (Before then, the county election board will recheck the computations reported by the inspector and judge who produced the form for the precinct.) The county election board will confirm that the votes cast in an election for each candidate and each public question on a direct record electronic voting system were correctly counted. Requirements for public notice and filing the certified results of the audit are the same as above. Also, within 90 days after each election in which an audit is conducted, the secretary of state will publish a report stating whether the results of the audit indicate that the discrepancy resulted from human error, intentional violations of election laws, unknown causes, or a combination of these factors.

Section 3-12-13-4 describes risk-limiting audits. These occur only in counties that are designated as post-election audit counties by the secretary of state. For a county to be designated as a post-election audit county, its election board must adopt a resolution requesting the secretary of state to designate the county in this way. The secretary of state must aim to designate a variety of counties as post-election audit counties, based on the number of active voters in the county. The secretary of state also will determine the number of elections that are subject to a post-election audit. It must be completed no later than the final Friday in June after a primary election, no later than December 20 after a general election if there is no petition for a recount or contest that affects the county, or within 60 days after completion of the recount or contest if a petition has been filed. The protocol for these audits is meant to use statistical methods to limit to acceptable levels the risk of certifying a preliminary election outcome that is incorrect.

Iowa Election Audit Laws

After each general election, the state commissioner must conduct an audit of the official canvass of votes from the preceding general election with the cooperation of the county commissioners. The state commissioner will determine the number of counties and precincts to be audited and select the precincts by lot. In every precinct selected, the commissioner will conduct a hand count of ballots cast in the preceding general election for U.S. President or Governor. The results of an audit will not change the results or invalidate the certification of an election. However, the commissioner may order an administrative recount if they determine that the results of an audit require this step.

In advance of all other elections, the state commissioner will order an audit of the election in the manner provided in this statute.

After completing an audit, one copy of the audit report will be transmitted to the state commissioner and one copy filed with the county board of supervisors no later than 20 days after the election.

Kansas Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Kansas Statutes Section 25-3009
  • Timing of audit: Prior to the meeting of the county board of canvassers to certify the official election results (per Kansas regulations, results must be transmitted to the secretary of state and county election office no later than 48 hours before the meeting of the county board of canvassers)
  • Scope of audit: 1 percent of all precincts, with a minimum of 1 precinct located in the county

The county election officer will conduct a manual audit or tally of each vote cast, regardless of the method of voting, in a selected precinct. The precinct or precincts for the audit are randomly selected after the election. In presidential election years, the audit will cover one federal race, one state legislative race, one county race, and one constitutional amendment question. In other even-numbered years, the audit will cover one federal race, one statewide race, one state legislative race, one county race, and one constitutional amendment question. In odd-numbered years, two local races will be randomly selected.

Moreover, in even-numbered years, any federal, statewide, or state legislative race that is within 1 percent of the total number of votes cast tallied on election night must be audited. The county election officer will conduct the audit in 10 percent of all county precincts in the race, with a minimum of one precinct in the county.

Notice of the time and location of the audit must be provided to the public at least five days in advance. The results of the audit will be compared to the unofficial election night returns, and a report will be submitted to the county election office and the secretary of state’s office before the meeting of the county board of canvassers. If a discrepancy is reported between the audit and the unofficial returns and cannot be resolved, the county election officer or the secretary of state may require audits of additional precincts.

Kentucky Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Kentucky Revised Statutes Section 117.383
  • Timing of audit: Unspecified, except that it is part of the official canvass
  • Scope of audit: Randomly selected precincts representing 3 percent to 5 percent of the total ballots cast in each election

The statute requires the audit to be conducted manually. It also establishes a risk-limiting audit pilot program. Kentucky regulations provide more details about the pilot program.

Section 117.305 describes a similar process called a recanvass. This is triggered if the county clerk or county board of elections takes notice of a discrepancy in the tally of votes cast in any precinct or number of precincts. A written request by a candidate also may trigger a recanvass if the difference between the number of votes received by the requesting candidate and the number of votes received by any other candidate or candidates for the same office is less than 1 percent of the total votes cast for the office.

Louisiana Election Audit Laws

The statute requires the secretary of state to adopt and implement uniform policies and procedures for the conduct of a post-election tabulation audit of paper ballots and records related to the election. However, this has not yet happened.

Maine Election Audit Laws

The statute allows the Secretary of State to conduct post-election audits of selected eligible elections, beginning in January 2025. These include any contested election for state or federal office and any election on a statewide referendum question. The audits are risk-limiting audits with a risk limit established by the Secretary of State before each eligible election. Public notice must be provided at least 24 hours before the start of the audit.

In addition, the Secretary of State will conduct a risk-limiting audit pilot after the 2024 general election and provide a report on the pilot program to the legislature by the following February.

Maryland Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Maryland Election Law Code Section 11-309
  • Timing of audit: Completed within 120 days after general election
  • Scope of audit: At least 2 percent of precincts statewide (including at least 1 randomly chosen precinct in each county) and a number of votes equal to at least 1 percent of the statewide total in the previous comparable general election of early votes, absentee votes, and provisional votes

The State Board of Elections must complete a manual audit within the parameters above after each statewide general election. If the manual audit shows a discrepancy, the State Board may expand the audit and take any other actions needed to resolve the discrepancy. Within 14 days after the conclusion of the audit, the State Board must post a report of the audit on its website, describing the precincts and number of votes selected for the audit, the results of the audit, and any discrepancy and how it was resolved. An audit may not have any effect on the certified election results, but it will be used to improve the voting system and voting process for future elections.

After each statewide primary election, the State Board must complete an automated software audit of the electronic images of all ballots cast in the election, and it may complete a manual audit of voter-verifiable paper records.

Massachusetts Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 54 Section 109A
  • Timing of audit: Completed audit report forms must be submitted no later than 14 days after the election
  • Scope of audit: 3 percent of all precincts in the state, rounded up to the next highest whole number

An audit under this statute is conducted after any presidential general election. Precincts to be audited are chosen in a random drawing supervised by the state secretary within 48 hours after polls are closed. Each precinct that is selected must conduct a hand-counted audit of votes cast on the day of election of races in which more than one candidate’s name appears on the ballot for President and Vice President, U.S. Senator, U.S. Representative, state senator, and state representative, as well as one statewide ballot question.

When there is a discrepancy between the hand-counted audit and the originally reported tally of the audited precincts, the discrepancy will be analyzed to determine its cause. The state secretary must oversee the analysis before publishing the findings and making them available online within 180 days of beginning the analysis. Moreover, if there is a discrepancy between the results reached through the audit and originally reported tallies, the hand count of the official paper ballots conducted through the audit will be the official vote of record. If there is a discrepancy between the results reached in a precinct through an audit and the originally reported tallies in that precinct, and this reasonably leads to doubt about the outcome of the election or systemic failure to accurately count ballots, the secretary may order audits of additional precincts, offices, or ballot questions as needed to ensure that the outcome of the election is accurate and that the cause of the systemic failure is identified.

Michigan Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Michigan Compiled Laws Section 168.31a (also see Post-Election Audit Manual)
  • Timing of audit: Within 30 days of canvass completion unless a recount has been ordered
  • Scope of audit: Results of at least 1 race in each precinct selected for an audit (in standard elections); results of at least 1 statewide race or statewide ballot question in a precinct selected for an audit (in statewide elections)

The statute provides the secretary of state with the authority to prescribe the procedures for election audits that include reviewing the documents, ballots, and procedures used during an election. An audit is not a recount and does not change any certified election results. Each county clerk who conducts an election audit must provide the results to the secretary of state within 20 days after the audit.

The audit manual further provides that the audit process will thoroughly review procedures performed before, during, and after the conduct of an election, including a review of voted ballots with a hand tally of select contests. An audit of the results of up to three contests in a general election and one contest in other elections on the ballot in each precinct will be conducted. The review of voted ballots will verify that the equipment used to count votes worked properly and yielded the correct result. Information collected as part of a post-election audit will be used as an educational tool for election administration. More specifically, discrepancies and deficiencies found as a result of the audit will be used as training points for the local clerk who is participating in the audit and aid in the determination of future training needs to be provided at the county and state levels.

Minnesota Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Minnesota Statutes Section 206.89
  • Timing of audit: Must begin not before the 11th day after the state general election and must conclude no later than the 18th day after the state general election; also, review must be completed no later than 2 days before the meeting of the state canvassing board
  • Scope of audit: At least 2 precincts in county with fewer than 50,000 registered voters; at least 3 precincts in county with 50,000-100,000 registered voters; at least 4 precincts, or 3 percent of the precincts if greater, in larger counties

The post-election review must cover votes cast for President or Governor, U.S. Senator, and U.S. Representative. The post-election review official may conduct a post-election review of votes cast for additional offices. The review must consist of a manual count of the ballots.

The results of the electronic voting system must differ from the manual count of the offices reviewed by no more than two votes if fewer than 1,200 voters cast ballots in the precinct, three votes if 1,200 to 1,599 voters cast ballots, four votes if 1,600 to 1,999 voters cast ballots, or five votes if 2,000 or more voters cast ballots. If there is a difference greater than the applicable threshold, the post-election review official must conduct an additional review in at least three precincts in the same jurisdiction as the discrepancy. If the second review in any of the reviewed precincts also indicates a difference greater than the applicable threshold, the county auditor must conduct a review of the ballots from all the remaining precincts in the county.

If the results from the countywide reviews from one or more counties comprising more than 10 percent of the total number of people voting in the election clearly indicate that an error in vote counting has occurred, the secretary of state must notify the post-election review official of each county in the district that they must conduct manual recounts of all the ballots in the district for the affected office. Results of the recount must be reported to the appropriate canvassing board within two weeks after the post-election review official received this notice.

Mississippi Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Mississippi Code Section 23-15-615
  • Timing of audit: Report must be submitted no later than 120 days after election
  • Scope of audit: Secretary of State must audit all 82 counties by randomly selecting from each of the congressional districts during the 2023, 2024, 2026, and 2027 general elections, and randomly selecting no more than 25 percent of the total precincts or no more than 5 precincts, whichever is less in each county

The statute requires the Secretary of State to randomly select the counties and precincts that will be audited at least 90 days before the election. No audit will occur until after a ballot box examination has occurred, and the period to contest an election has expired.

The Secretary of State must compile a report of the audits and submit the report to the Governor and various other officials. The report will describe any major finding that may affect the outcome of the election and whether any voters were disenfranchised. It will then provide a detailed report of any major or minor findings, along with recommended changes to county and Secretary of State practices. More generally, if the Secretary of State finds any issues that could affect the outcome of an election or cause voters to be disenfranchised, the Secretary of State must partner with local county election officials to develop a plan to correct those issues, which will include additional training.

Missouri Election Audit Laws

One contested race or ballot issue to be manually recounted will be randomly selected from each of four categories when applicable: Presidential and Vice-Presidential electors, U.S. Senate candidates, and statewide candidates; statewide ballot issues; U.S. Representative candidates and state general assembly candidates; and partisan circuit and associate circuit judge candidates and all non-partisan judicial retention candidates. In addition to these groups, the manual recount team will select at least one contested race or ballot issue from all political subdivisions and special districts, including the county, in the selected precincts. Moreover, the team will select all races in which the margin of victory between the two top candidates is no greater than 0.5 percent of the number of votes cast for the office or issue.

If the results of the manual recount differ by more than 0.5 percent from the results of the electronically tabulated vote results, the manual recount team will notify the election authority. They will investigate the causes of any discrepancy and resolve any discrepancies before the date of certification.

Montana Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Montana Code Section 13-17-503 et seq.
  • Timing of audit: Must be completed at least one day before the official canvass by the county board of canvassers
  • Scope of audit: At least 10 percent of the precincts in each county or a minimum of 2 precincts in each county, whichever is greater

The audit must include elections for two statewide office races (if any), two federal office races, two legislative office races, two statewide ballot issues (if any), and one countywide race if requested by the board of county commissioners. Races, ballot issues, and precincts must be selected between seven and nine days after a federal election.

Section 13-17-507 describes what happens when a discrepancy is found. First, if a discrepancy exists between the vote-counting machine totals and the manual count totals, the random-sample audit results must serve as the definitive record for the purposes of the canvass. More specifically, if there is a discrepancy of more than 0.5 percent of total ballots cast, or five ballots if that is greater, and if this resulted from the vote-counting machine rather than administrative or user error, the vote-counting machine involved in the discrepancy may not be used again until it has been tested and approved, and at least three additional precincts in the county must be audited for the office or ballot issue in question.

If the audit of the additional precincts results in a discrepancy for those precincts of more than 0.5 percent of total ballots cast, or five ballots if that is greater, and if this resulted from the vote-counting machine rather than administrative or user error, the vote-counting machine involved in the discrepancy may not be used again until it has been tested and approved.

Under Section 13-17-510, meanwhile, the board of county commissioners may request a random-sample audit of vote-counting machines after unofficial results are available to the public in a non-federal election, but before the official canvass by the county board of canvassers.

Nebraska Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: None (but see Election Security on Nebraska Secretary of State website)
  • Timing of audit: Not specified
  • Scope of audit: 2 to 2.5 percent of precincts

Nebraska does not have a statute specifically addressing election audits. However, the Nebraska Secretary of State’s office explains on its website that it works with county election officials to complete a post-election audit after every statewide election. Votes counted in one federal race, one state race, and one local race are hand counted and compared to the machine tabulations for the same races in those precincts. Any discrepancies are checked and noted in a report provided to the Secretary of State’s office.

Nevada Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Nevada Revised Statutes Section 293.247 (also see Nevada regulations); Section 293.394
  • Timing of audit: Results must be transmitted to Secretary of State within nine days after the election but before the canvass (for traditional audit); results must be submitted to Secretary of State no later than 15 days after audit is completed (for risk-limiting audit)
  • Scope of audit: 2 percent of the mechanical recording devices, or at least 20 mechanical recording devices if that is greater, in counties with 100,000 or more residents (for traditional audit); 3 percent of the mechanical recording devices, or at least 4 mechanical recording devices if that is greater, in counties with fewer than 100,000 residents (for traditional audit)

Nevada has regularly held a post-election certification (traditional) audit, while recently introducing a risk-limiting audit. Describing the post-election certification audit, Section 293.247 requires the Secretary of State to adopt regulations defining the procedures to be used for the testing, use, and auditing of a mechanical voting system that directly records the votes electronically and that creates a paper record when a voter casts a ballot. These regulations provide a more detailed description of the audit. It requires comparing each vote cast for each candidate and on each measure that was electronically recorded on the mechanical recording device to each vote cast for each candidate and on each measure that was recorded on the attached VVPAT (voter-verified paper audit trail). The comparison may be conducted manually or by a mechanical device.

If a discrepancy of four or more votes is discovered, the county clerk must notify the Secretary of State and investigate the cause of the discrepancy. If it cannot be resolved, the county clerk must select an additional 2 percent of the mechanical recording devices with attached VVPATs (3 percent in counties with fewer than 100,000 residents), or 20 devices (four devices in counties with fewer than 100,000 residents) if that is greater. The results of the audit must include an explanation of any discrepancy and its cause, if known.

Meanwhile, Section 293.394 describes the risk-limiting audit. This version of the statute, which took effect in January 2024, requires each county clerk to conduct a risk-limiting audit of the results of an election before the certification of the results, in accordance with regulations adopted by the Secretary of State. However, at the time of writing, the only currently effective regulation involving risk-limiting audits is limited to deadlines for submitting and posting results. It requires the Secretary of State to post the audit results online no later than 10 days after receiving them.

New Hampshire Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: New Hampshire Revised Statutes Section 660:34
  • Timing of audit: Results must be made available prior to 12 P.M. on Friday after election
  • Scope of audit: At least 8 ballot counting devices; 2 percent of ballots processed by each device if this is greater than 50 ballots, and otherwise 50 ballots or the total number processed

In 2024, New Hampshire introduced an audit for each state primary, general elections, and the presidential primary. This involves selecting a random sample of the paper ballots processed by each device subject to audit and comparing each selected paper ballot with the voters choices recorded by the audit equipment for that ballot. Differences identified during the comparison must be documented. If there are significant differences, the secretary of state may expand the number of ballots in the sample and may order a full hand recount.

(New Hampshire still has a separate pre-existing audit procedure triggered when there are general election recounts of state representative races. This audit is conducted by using the ballots for 10 of the state representative races to be recounted, or for each recounted race if fewer than 10 races are recounted. The audit covers votes cast for President, U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, or Governor. A full recount is allowed when there is a discrepancy of greater than 1 percent from the election results.)

New Jersey Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: New Jersey Revised Statutes Section 19:61-9
  • Timing of audit: Must begin 13 days after the election and be completed before the certification of results (for general elections); must begin within 24 hours after Secretary of State announces the election districts where audits will be conducted
  • Scope of audit: At least 2 percent of election districts in each county in which each audited election appears on the ballot (county and municipal elections in fewer than 100 election districts are exempt)

Audits will be conducted for each election held for federal or state office, including the offices of Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and member of the Legislature, and for county and municipal offices selected by the Secretary of State. Any procedure used by the audit team must be implemented to ensure with at least 99 percent statistical power that a 100 percent manual recount of the voter-verifiable paper records would not alter the electoral outcome reported by the audit for each federal, gubernatorial, or other statewide election. For each election held for state office, other than Governor and Lieutenant Governor, and for county and municipal elections in 100 or more election districts, any procedure used by the audit team must be implemented to ensure with at least 90 percent statistical power that a 100 percent manual recount of the voter-verifiable paper records would not alter the electoral outcome reported by the audit.

If the Secretary of State, based on a recommendation of a majority of the audit team, determines that any of the hand-to-eye counts conducted in an audit show cause for concern about the accuracy of the results of an election, the audit team will oversee hand-to-eye counts in any additional election districts or audit units as the Secretary of State sees fit. Moreover, additional hand-to-eye counts will be conducted if, in the initial audit, any discrepancy attributable to the electronic counting system would alter the vote share of any candidate or ballot position by 0.1 percent or more of the hand-counted votes in the sample. If this happens, the audit will be expanded by using the same number of election districts (and audit units when possible) as the initial audit. (If the initial audit comprised more than half the election districts and audit units, the expanded audit will be a full hand-to-eye count of the remaining election districts and audit units.) Further hand-to-eye counts will be conducted if a discrepancy attributable to the electronic counting system detected by the initial or subsequent expanded audit indicates a substantial possibility that a complete hand-to-eye recount would alter the outcome of the election.

New Mexico Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: New Mexico Statutes Section 1-14-13.2
  • Timing of audit: Sample of precincts must be selected within 12 days after election; county clerks generally must report results to auditor within 14 days of notice to conduct voting system check
  • Scope of audit: All federal offices, governor, contests in the regular local election, and the statewide elective office (other than governor) for which the winning candidate won by the smallest percentage margin of all candidates for statewide office; number of precincts depends on the margin of victory for each office

The auditor must publicly select a random sample of precincts from a pool of all precincts in the state. The random sample must be chosen in a process that will ensure with at least 90 percent probability for the selected offices that faulty tabulators would be detected if they would change the outcome of the election for a selected office.

The auditor will determine the error rate in the sample for each office. If the winning margin decreases, and the error rate based on the difference between the vote totals of hand recounts of the paper ballots and the original precinct vote totals exceeds 90 percent of the winning margin for an office, another sample of the same size as the original sample must be selected, and the original precinct vote totals will be compared to the vote totals of hand recounts. If the error rate based on the first and second sample exceeds 90 percent of the winning margin for the office, the state canvassing board will order a full hand recount of the ballots for that office.

New York Election Audit Laws

The audit tallies for each voting machine or system will be compared to the tallies recorded by the voting machine or system, and a report will be made of the comparison that will be filed with the Board of Elections. If a complete audit is conducted, the results of the audit will be used by the canvassing board in making the statement of canvass and determinations of candidates elected and propositions rejected or approved. (A “complete audit” means a hand count of all the votes.) The results of a partial voter-verifiable record audit will not be used instead of voting machine or system tallies.

Board of Elections regulations provide further details about what happens when a discrepancy arises. If any unresolved discrepancy is detected between the manual count and the machine or system electronic count, even an unresolved discrepancy of a single vote, the manual count will be conducted for a second time on the machine or system to confirm the discrepancy. If certain criteria are met, the audit will be expanded to an additional 5 percent of each type of the same type of voting machine or system that contains the discrepancy, then an additional 12 percent, and finally a full manual count. County boards of elections also retain the authority to order manual counts under additional circumstances as they see fit.

North Carolina Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: North Carolina General Statutes Section 163-182.1
  • Timing of audit: Precincts must be selected after the initial count of election returns for the county is publicly released, or 24 hours after polls close on election day if earlier
  • Scope of audit: 1 or more full precincts in each county, full counts of mailed absentee ballots, full counts of 1 or more one-stop early voting sites, or a combination

North Carolina provides for a sample hand-to-eye count of the paper ballots of a statewide ballot item in each county. In a presidential election, the presidential ballot item will be the subject of the sampling. If there is no statewide ballot item, the State Board of Elections will provide a process for selecting district or local ballot items to adequately sample the electorate.

In the event of a material discrepancy between the electronic or mechanical count and a hand-to-eye count, the hand-to-eye count will control unless paper ballots have been lost or destroyed, or there is another reasonable basis to conclude that the hand-to-eye count is not the true count. If the discrepancy between the hand-to-eye count and the mechanical or electronic count is significant, a complete hand-to-eye count will be conducted.

North Dakota Election Audit Laws

North Dakota does not have a true audit procedure. Instead, after each election, the secretary of state will order a random testing of the voting system programming for one precinct in each county according to logic and accuracy testing procedures. This involves processing a preaudited group of ballots on which are recorded a predetermined number of valid votes for each candidate and measure. It must include for each office one or more ballots that have votes in excess of the number allowed by law to test the ability of the automatic tabulating equipment to reject these votes. If an error is detected, the cause must be ascertained and corrected, and an errorless count must be secured and filed.

Ohio Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Ohio Revised Code Section 3505.331 (also see Ohio Election Directive 2022-15)
  • Timing of audit: Generally must begin no earlier than 6 days after official results are declared and must be completed no later than the 21st day after official results are declared (results must be certified to Secretary of State within 5 days after completion)
  • Scope of audit: Number of votes cast on all selected units to be audited must equal at least 5 percent of the total number of votes cast in the county (for percentage-based audit)

An audit occurs after a general election or a primary election held in an even-numbered year. The statute generally requires that the audit cover no fewer than three contested races, questions, or issues. Counties may use either a percentage-based audit or a risk-limiting audit.

For a percentage-based audit, boards of elections must determine whether they will conduct the post-election audit by precinct, polling location, or individual voting machine, but it is preferable to audit the smallest unit available. A county must escalate the audit if its accuracy rate is less than 99.5 percent in a contest with a certified margin that is at least 1 percent (calculated as a percentage of ballots cast on which the contest appeared), or less than 99.8 percent in a contest with a certified margin that is less than 1 percent. Escalation involves drawing a second random sample of at least 5 percent of votes cast, selected from units that were not previously audited. If the accuracy rate from the two samples is below 99.5 percent, the county will investigate the cause of the discrepancy and report its findings to the Secretary of State’s Office, which may require a 100 percent hand count.

A risk-limiting audit involves using statistical methods to limit to acceptable levels the risk of certifying an incorrect outcome for a particular race, question, or issue. Election officials will hand count randomly sampled ballots until the results of the hand count provide sufficiently strong evidence that a hand count of all the ballots would confirm the election result, or until all the ballots have been hand counted if that is earlier.

If the results of a completed audit or a full hand count indicate that the canvass or the previously declared official election results must be amended, the board must amend the canvass or issue an amended declaration of the official results.

Oklahoma Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: 26 Oklahoma Statutes Section 3-130
  • Timing of audit: Determined by the Secretary of the State Election Board
  • Scope of audit: Manual or electronic examination of a limited number of ballots

The statute provides authority to the Secretary of the State Election Board to direct the secretary of a county election board to conduct a post-election audit of election results for the purpose of maintaining the security of the election system by ensuring that voting devices and software used in an election correctly tabulated votes. The secretary of a county election board must report the findings of the audit to the Secretary of the State Election Board, and this report will be available to the public. An audit will be conducted only at the direction of the Secretary of the State Election Board.

The Oklahoma State Election Board website provides more details about post-election audits, while noting that the outcome of an audit cannot change or alter the certified election results of an election being audited.

Oregon Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Oregon Revised Statutes Section 254.529 (hand count audit); Section 254.532 (risk-limiting audit)
  • Timing of audit: Hand count must begin no later than 27th day after election and be completed no later than 35th day after election; risk-limiting audit must be conducted in a timely manner that permits the initially reported outcome to be corrected before an election contest is certified
  • Scope of audit: 10 percent of precincts if margin of victory is less than 1 percent, 5 percent of precincts if margin of victory is 1-2 percent, 3 percent of precincts if margin of victory is at least 2 percent (for hand count); 0.1 percent risk limit (for risk-limiting audit)

At each primary election, general election, and special election, the county clerk must decide whether to conduct a hand count or a risk-limiting audit. If the county clerk determines that a hand count will be conducted, they must conduct a hand count of ballots cast in the election contest between the two candidates receiving the largest number of votes in the county, an election contest for an office to be voted on in the state at large, and, if possible, an election contest for a state measure.

If a hand count results in a tally of votes for a candidate or measure that is different from the tally of votes produced by the vote tally system for that candidate or measure, and the difference in any race is greater than 0.5 percent, the county clerk must conduct a second hand count of the same ballots. If the second hand count results in a tally of votes that is different from the tally of votes produced by the vote tally system, and the difference in any race is greater than 0.5 percent, the county clerk must conduct a hand count of all ballots counted by that vote tally system. The hand count is the official tally of votes for that vote tally system.

If the county clerk decides to conduct a risk-limiting audit, they will conduct this audit for one or more single-county election contests. The Secretary of State is responsible for setting the risk limit and establishing procedures. Oregon regulations describe these procedures and set a risk limit of 0.1 percent.

Pennsylvania Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: 25 Pennsylvania Statutes Section 3031.17; Risk Limiting Audit Directive
  • Timing of audit: Part of the computation and canvass of returns (statutory audit); must be completed before a county board of elections finalizes the certification of official election returns and no later than the third Monday after the primary or November election (risk-limiting audit)
  • Scope of audit: 2 percent of votes cast, or 2,000 votes if that is less (statutory audit)

The main audit statute requires the county board of elections to conduct a statistical recount of a random sample of ballots after each election, using manual, mechanical, or electronic devices of a type different from those used for the election.

In 2022, moreover, the Pennsylvania Department of State released a directive for risk-limiting audits, which will supplement rather than replace the statutory audit. After each regularly scheduled primary and November election, the county boards of elections must participate in a statewide post-election ballot audit involving a review of a random sample of votes cast in one or more randomly selected races. Audit results must be transmitted to the Department of State concurrent with the county’s certification of official election returns. In addition to reporting the results, the county must note any anomalies or errors found during the audit process.

Rhode Island Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Rhode Island General Laws Section 17-19-37.4
  • Timing of audit: Not specified (results must be published within 48 hours of being accepted by the state board of elections)
  • Scope of audit: Hand tally of the votes in 1 or more audit units (defined as a precinct, a set of ballots, or a single ballot)

The statute requires the state board of elections to conduct risk-limiting audits after the presidential preference primary and general elections. The board is also authorized to conduct risk-limiting audits after all statewide primary, general, and special elections. The state board must determine which local, statewide, and federal contests are subject to an audit.

A risk-limiting audit will begin with a hand tally of the votes in one or more audit units and will continue to hand tally votes in additional audit units until there is strong statistical evidence that the electoral outcome is correct. If counting additional audit units does not provide strong statistical evidence that the electoral outcome is correct, the audit will continue until there has been a full manual tally to determine the correct outcome of the audited contest. If a risk-limiting audit leads to a full manual tally of the ballots cast using the voting system, the vote counts according to the manual tally will replace the vote counts reported for the purpose of determining the official results.

South Carolina Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: South Carolina Code of Laws Section 7-3-20
  • Timing of audit: Prior to certification by State Board of Canvassers
  • Scope of audit: Required in all statewide elections, and may be performed after any other election at the discretion of the executive director of the State Election Commission

The statute requires the executive director of the State Election Commission to establish methods of auditing election results, which may include risk-limiting audits, hand-count audits, results verification through independent third-party vendors that specialize in election auditing, ballot reconciliation, or any other method deemed appropriate by the executive director.

The South Carolina Election Commission provides more information about audits. It explains that the Commission requires counties to audit election results through hand-count audits and results-verification audits. Hand-count audits are required for all federal- and state-level elections. These audits are required for early voting centers and election day precincts, with the specific number of audits based on the number of active registered voters in each county. Early voting centers, precincts, and contests are randomly selected by the Audit Division of the Commission.

Meanwhile, a results-verification audit uses independent software to retabulate the results from an entire election by using scanned ballot images. The results from this audit are compared to the results from the state voting system. Anything exceeding a tolerance level of 0.5 percent for discrepancies will undergo additional auditing.

South Dakota Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: South Dakota Codified Laws Section 12-17B-18 et seq.
  • Timing of audit: Within 15 days after completion of the state canvassing of a primary or general election
  • Scope of audit: 5 percent of the precincts in the county

The statute requires manually counting all the votes cast in two contests and comparing the results of the manual count to the results for those precincts at the county canvass. The county auditor will select the contests for the audit at random, and one contest randomly selected for the audit must be a statewide contest. The county auditor must send the results of the audit to the secretary of state, which will publish the results on its website.

If the results of the audit show a discrepancy in the results greater than the margin by which any contest for elected office on the ballot in the county was decided, the auditor must notify the candidates for that office. Any candidate who receives a notification from the county auditor will have an additional seven days from when the auditor sends the notification to file a verified petition requesting a recount.

Tennessee Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Tennessee Code Section 2-20-103
  • Timing of audit: Before the election is certified (for automatic mandatory audits)
  • Scope of audit: 1 voting precinct in a county with fewer than 300,000 residents, or 5 voting precincts in a county with 300,000 or more residents, and 1 precinct-based optical scan tabulator used to count ballots during early voting (for automatic mandatory audits)

Starting with the first election in 2024, the secretary of state will randomly select county election commissions that must conduct an audit after each August and November election. After each August election, the secretary of state will select at least three counties to audit. After each November election, the secretary of state will select at least six counties to audit. The secretary of state will select the audit methodology to be used in each county from either a traditional tabulation audit, risk-limiting audit, or performance audit.

In addition, the statute requires a county election commission using a precinct-based optical scanner and not selected for audit to conduct automatic mandatory audits of the voter-verified paper ballots cast for the top race on the ballot after each August and November election. For a November election, the county election commission must conduct automatic mandatory audits for the U.S. President in a presidential election and the governor in a gubernatorial election. For an August election, the county election commission must conduct automatic mandatory audits for the highest race for county office. (The county election commission may select one or more additional races to be audited.)

If the county election commission finds that there is a variance of more than 1 percent between the unofficial election results of the top race and each other race audited and the automatic audit, the county election commission must randomly select at least 3 percent of the voting precincts in the county. (These may include the voting precincts previously audited.) The county election commission must identify the ballot boxes from the selected voting precincts, obtain the ballots from the ballot boxes, and insert the ballots into a different optical scan tabulator than the tabulator used to originally count the ballots. The county election commission also may conduct a manual hand count of the same ballots subjected to this automatic audit. The automatic audit or the manual hand count audit must cover the top race and each other race audited on the ballot in the voting precincts used in the expanded audit. The county election commission may expand the hand count to other races if a hand count is conducted.

If all the ballots in a race are counted as part of the manual hand count audit, the results of the hand count audit must be used as the official results to be certified by the county election commission. Also, the results of a difference between precinct-based optical scan tabulations or the hand count audit must be available for use in an election contest.

Texas Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Texas Election Code Section 127.201
  • Timing of audit: Must begin no later than 72 hours after polls close and be completed no later than the 21st day after election day
  • Scope of audit: 1 percent of precincts or 3 precincts, whichever is greater

In an audit of a general election for state and county officers, primary election, or election on a proposed amendment to the state constitution or other statewide measure submitted by the legislature, the secretary of state will select the precincts to be counted. The secretary of state must designate not more than three offices and not more than three propositions to be counted in the selected precincts.

No later than the third day after the count is completed, the general custodian of election records must deliver a written report of the results to the secretary of state. (The audit statute does not apply to the tabulation of electronic voting system results for a voting system that uses direct recording electronic voting machines.)

Texas election rules require an attempt to determine the source of any discrepancy revealed in the audit.

Utah Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: None for auditing results
  • Timing of audit: Must be completed before the canvass
  • Scope of audit: 1 percent or 1,000 ballots in each county, whichever is fewer (but at least 50 ballots)

Utah does not publicly publish the policy for its post-election tabulation audit, which is not specifically delineated by statute or regulation. As explained by a 2023 report, counties submit a list of ballot batches with the number of ballots in each batch, and the lieutenant governor’s office randomly selects batches for audit. The original paper ballot is reviewed, hand-counted, and compared to machine tallies to ensure a match.

(Utah also has a separate statutory procedure for signature verification audits. This involves conducting signature comparisons between signatures on envelopes and voter signatures maintained by the election officer.)

Vermont Election Audit Laws

The Secretary of State must conduct a random audit of any polling place election results for a general election. The Secretary must publicly announce the results of the audit and the results from the original return of the vote. If the Secretary finds that the audit indicates possible fraud in the count or return of votes, they will refer the results to the Attorney General for possible prosecution.

Virginia Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Code of Virginia Section 24.2-671.2
  • Timing of audit: Prior to the certification of the election results
  • Scope of audit: Hand count of randomly sampled printed ballots; see below for specific rules on covered contests

Virginia requires a risk-limiting audit, which must continue until there is either strong statistical evidence that the reported outcome is correct, or a full hand count of all ballots cast in the contested race that determines the outcome.

In the year of a general election for members of the U.S. House of Representatives, the statute requires a risk-limiting audit of at least one randomly selected contested race for that office. In the year of a general election for members of the General Assembly, the statute requires a risk-limiting audit of at least one randomly selected contested race for that office. In any year in which there is not a general election for a statewide office, the statute requires a risk-limiting audit of at least one randomly selected contested race for a local office for which certification by the State Board of Elections is required. In any year, the statute requires any other risk-limiting audit of a contested race that is necessary to ensure that each locality participates in a risk-limiting audit of an office in its jurisdiction at least once every five years or that the State Board finds appropriate. (However, no contested race will be selected to receive a risk-limiting audit if the tabulation of the unofficial result for the contested race shows a difference of no more than 1 percent of the total vote cast for the top two candidates.)

The Department of Elections will publish the results of all risk-limiting audits on its website. If a risk-limiting audit escalates to a full hand count, the results of the hand count will be used to certify the election instead of the tabulation of the unofficial results obtained before the risk-limiting audit.

Washington Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Revised Code of Washington Section 29A.60.185
  • Timing of audit: Prior to certification of the election
  • Scope of audit: Up to 4 percent of direct recording electronic voting devices or other in-person ballot marking systems per county, or 1 direct recording electronic voting device or other in-person ballot marking system per county if that is greater (if the method chosen involves an audit of results of votes cast on the DRE voting devices or other in-person ballot marking systems)

The statute requires the county auditor to conduct an audit of duplicated ballots, as well as an audit that uses at least one of four enumerated methods. The first method involves an audit of results of votes cast on the direct recording electronic voting devices, or other in-person ballot marking systems, used in the county if there are races or issues with more than 10 votes cast on all DRE voting devices or other in-person ballot marking systems in the county. The paper records must be tabulated manually on a quarter of the devices or systems selected for audit. Three races or issues must be audited on each device or system.

Other available methods include a random check of the ballot counting equipment, a risk-limiting audit, and an independent electronic audit of the original ballot counting equipment used in the county. The random check may involve up to three precincts or six batches, depending on the ballot counting procedures in the county. It will be limited to one office or issue. For the risk-limiting audit, the secretary of state must set the risk limit and randomly select for audit at least one statewide contest, as well as at least one ballot contest for each county other than the selected statewide contest. (If there is no statewide contest in the election at issue, the county auditor will randomly select a ballot contest for audit.) For the independent electronic audit, the county auditor may either conduct an audit of all ballots cast or limit the audit to three precincts or six batches.

For each audit method, the secretary of state must adopt procedures for expanding the audit to include additional ballots when an audit results in a discrepancy. The procedure must specify under which circumstances a discrepancy will lead to an audit of additional ballots, as well as the method to determine how many additional ballots will be selected. The secretary of state must adopt procedures to investigate the cause of any discrepancy found during an audit.

Washington, D.C. Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: District of Columbia Code Section 1-1001.09a
  • Timing of audit: Before certification of the official election results
  • Scope of audit: At least 5 percent of the precincts with precinct-level vote-tabulation machines during the election, and at least 5 percent of the voter-verifiable records that are tabulated centrally, including mail-in ballots and special ballots

After each general and special election, the District of Columbia Board of Elections must conduct a public manual audit of the voter-verifiable records tabulated by the Board. Of the voter-verifiable records audited, the Board must examine no fewer than three contests, of which at least one contest must be a District-wide contest, and at least two contests must be a ward-wide race. The statute also provides that the Board must select at least one contest in addition to these.

If an audit initially reveals a discrepancy between the machine result and the tally from the manual audit that yields an error rate greater than 0.25 percent, or 20 percent of the margin of victory if that is less, and the discrepancy is not attributed to marking errors, a second count must be conducted. If the second count confirms the discrepancy above, the Board must also audit another precinct in each ward in which the contest appeared on the ballot, as well as an additional 5 percent of all centrally tabulated ballots. If this additional audit sample also reveals a discrepancy between the machine result and the tally from the manual audit that yields an error rate greater than 0.25 percent, or 20 percent of the margin of victory if that is less, the Board must audit all precincts and centrally tabulated ballots relevant to the contest.

The results of the manual audits will be deemed the true and correct results of the election contests at issue with respect to the votes audited. The results will be used instead of further counting in any automatic recounts.

West Virginia Election Audit Laws

The statute requires voter-verified paper ballots in the chosen precincts to be counted manually. When the vote total from the manual count of the voter-verified paper ballots for all votes cast in a precinct differs by more than 1 percent from the automated vote tabulation equipment, or when it results in a different outcome, the discrepancies must be disclosed to the public, and all of the voter-verified paper ballots must be manually counted. If there is a difference between the vote totals from the automated vote tabulation equipment and the corresponding vote totals from the manual count of the voter-verified paper ballots, the manual count is the vote of record.

Wisconsin Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Wisconsin Statutes Section 7.08 (also see audit procedures guide provided by Wisconsin Elections Commission)
  • Timing of audit: Generally must be completed a week prior to deadline for certification of results, with some exceptions
  • Scope of audit: Must cover each voting system used in the state (most recently, at least 5 reporting units for each voting system and 1 unit from each county)

After each general election, the Wisconsin Elections Commission must audit the performance of each voting system used in the state to determine the error rate of the system in counting ballots that are validly cast. If the error rate exceeds the rate permitted under the standards of the Federal Election Commission that were in effect in 2002, the Wisconsin Elections Commission must take remedial action and order remedial action to be taken by affected counties and municipalities to ensure compliance with the standards.

The Wisconsin Elections Commission guide notes that the audit is not an election results confirmation audit. Instead, it is intended to ensure that the votes tabulated by the voting equipment are being counted accurately. If a discrepancy between the machine tally and the paper record tally cannot be reasonably explained, the Commission will request that the voting equipment manufacturer investigate and explain the reasons for any differences. If the vendor does not provide a sufficient written explanation within 30 days, the Commission may suspend approval of the voting system.

In 2022, Wisconsin audited four contests, including the top contest on the ballot, which was the gubernatorial election.

Wyoming Election Audit Laws

  • Key law: Wyoming Statutes Section 22-6-130
  • Timing of audit: Must be completed no later than the first Thursday after a primary, special, or general election
  • Scope of audit: No more than 5 percent of the total number of ballots cast

Each county clerk must complete an audit of the county’s unofficial election results by identifying and reviewing the smallest observable percentage between the statewide candidates who received the most votes and the statewide candidates who received the second-highest votes for each contest in the county. (The county clerk may add more contests to the audit at their discretion.) The county clerk will use a formula developed by the University of Wyoming in using the smallest observable percentage to determine a statistically significant sample size. They must provide the results to the secretary of state no later than one day before the meeting of the state canvassing board.

Civil Rights and Discrimination Legal Center Contents   

Related Areas